Copyright, Disclaimer & Terms of Use

This blog does not operate for commercial purpose, but focuses on referee education and information only.

If you feel that any content is belonging to you exclusively or is misplaced, please contact us immediately so that we can remove it!

This also counts for comments which restrict you in your dignity and liberty, which are abusive or insultive. Sometimes such types of comments are not directly seen by this blog's administrators. In order to make them be removed as soon as possible, you can contact us via mail (see above).

May 18, 2017

Jens Maae in charge of UEFA Under-17 EURO 2017 Final

Danish international referee Jens Maae has been chosen to officiate the final of UEFA's Under-17 EURO 2017 between Spain and England in Croatia. He will be assisted by Finnish Mika Lamppu and Russia's Aleksey Vorontsov on the sidelines. Anastassios Papapetrou from Greece will serve as fourth official. UEFA Vice Refereeing Officer Marc Batta will observe and assess their performance. Good luck!
Underneath, you find all assignments (thanks to our readers!).

64
Comments:

This might seem a stupid question: but as the officials are from different countries, are they still able to communicate well with one another? And do they all speak English well enough as I assume that's the main language?

This is hilarious!!! If they were to change the appointments they should've surely done it beforehand before publishing the appointments... FIFA always ends up making a bit of joke of itself really!!! 🤔

The procedure in this case could have been indeed faster, the fact that this was a significant incident was clear. However, step by step, the system is going to be improved. I want to say a thing based on my feeling: this RC is surely supportable, but at the same time not a 100% / clear one. Very often we have such situations during a game, in which a referee either misses the incident or decides for a YC. I think that with VAR review we will see more "harsh" RC, because in front of a video referee will have a different perception and in most of the cases he will go for the major punishment. That is a good thing under some aspects, of course, but there are also some possible points for discussion: can a referee be influenced by the fact that VAR is there and people expect a RC rather than YC in a situation? Hope you got what I mean, what do you think?

Match Korea Republic - Guinea:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS7FtZ-gL9IMinute 00:40 in the video, again VAR was used. I think AR missed offside, it looks quite clear even live. Then, it should have been checked also whether the ball was out before the final pass. Correctly disallowed goal.

Hm, when I stop the video, the offside is not obvious to me, it rather looks like onside. Probably the VAR had a better perspective though.Same counts for the question, whether the ball was out. Judging by this video, rather not.

Coming back to the incident at 75-78' of ARG-ENG (https://streamable.com/ccjue), I have a lot of questions. In this case, the correct decision was taken.1- What takes so long? Surely the VARs should be able to judge in 1-2 replays that this is a) a reviewable case of potential VC; and b) necessitates the referee to view the play. Why does it take 1 min 45 to reach that decision?2- We can see on the replays that the 4th official is both near and has a clear line of sight. He also has the duty to assist the referee with cases of SFP/VC. Should he have caught it? Is the VAR really needed here, or would a better teamwork have resolved the situation?3- VAR rules state that players who protest VAR decisions should be cautioned; why does the referee allow himself to be followed by a bunch of players? Shouldn't that be an automatic YC to the first who draws near? In my mind, the application of dissent YC should be stringer on VAR decisions than anything else; otherwise it will be chaos. If the claim (I say, the "claim") is that a referee with VAR is infallible, then surely any dissent is unsporting?4- How does play resume? I assume they returned to the free kick?5- VARs review suspected cases of VC. Suppose in this case, they inform the referee of this; he watches the video, deems it reckless but not violent. Is he allowed to give a FK+YC? Or is it RC or nothing, since VARs are not allowed to review YC? Can VARs review it themselves and suggest a YC?

So again, I am not convinced by the VAR, and I believe that the rushed roll-out by FIFA will be disastrous (as you may have seen, all MLS matches after the All-Star game in July will have live VAR. No idea who they'll put in the cabin as they barely have enough top refs to put on the field).

5 is a very interesting point for discussion, and I must be honest, I was wrong. Indeed, it shouldn't be possible for referee to issue YC. This situation has been presented as black or white case: so RC, in case, otherwise nothing. This would make more evident what I stated before: will a referee be influenced by the fact that VAR is proposing a certain decision? Will referee have the "courage" to confirm his original choice, in case?When the reason of the review is a potential RC...

I think it is not like that. If a situation is a possible RC (SFP/reckless), if the answer is reckless, the YC should be shown anyway. When they say that VAR is for RC only, I think they mean that if a situation is a possible case of VC/SFP, it can be reviewed, but not if it is between careless and reckless. It would make no sense not to show a clear YC because they thought it could have been RC but then decided it was not so. The YC was clear: it should be issued, even after watching the replay.

George: Yet discipline committees in league all over the world function like that: they issue retroactive RCs, but not YCs. It makes sense to have it that way: otherwise, it removes all meaning to 'only cases of potential VC are reviewable' (plus other categories, of course).VARs could still recommend/lead to YCs for DOGSO in the penalty area, for instance, but it seems to me the current rules exclude YCs for missed reckless fouls.

Yes, YC for missed reckless fouls are excluded. But if the foul is not missed and what is being questioned is the color of the card, and VAR is used, if the final decision is "reckless", the YC must be issued. LotG are above the VAR rules, for me at least.

Take into account review situations after the game, and usually it does not make much difference to issue a YC afterwards. However, in this situation the game must still go on. If a YC is not shown because the VAR was used although it is completely clear that it was deserved, that alters the progress of the match while that, after the game, doesn't change a thing of it.

I agree with Emil: FIFA's VAR programme has the power to deliver fatal results in next year's World Cup. And I think the main reason for that is a lack of opportunities to learn and train. There have been some seminars, yes, but no continuous learning experience.

Compare that with Germany: Every weekend those referees who are not appointed themselves as referees gather in Cologne and watch Bundesliga games in an offline mode, make a protocol. On top of that, there have been some real games behind closed doors where referees were able to train and learn with VAR input in a real game scenario. That's how you can prepare the VAR programme before it is officially used. What FIFA does is not going far enough, but I would also like to say that being fair it is quite a complex task to unify and teach the VAR experiment to officialswho are coming from 6 continents and not using the VAR regularly.

So there is also the danger that FIFA's referee department might slightly (ab)use this competition to justify the deployment of VARs in Russia. So actionism is not impossible.

Finally, I would also like to say that we should not be biased in any way to this programme. Just highlighting doubtful or maybe even bad examples of VAR decisions is only one side of the coin. There have been many positive cases so far, too. And most of those decisions which went wrong or were dubious were, IMO, the result of poor preparation and misunderstood guidelines. Just take the Kassai example: Was an AR among the VARs? Did any of the 3 FIFA referees Skomina, Geiger and Gassama even think of the possibility that there was an offside offence by the player fouled a second later? ...

For me it's a correct decision by the VAR to recommend the referee for an onfield review. The action of the player is violent conduct for me. Clear use of the elbow with force and speed. I agree that the time waisting could be shorter, however we must take in consideration the stress which the VAR will dealing and he has to be 100% sure. Perhaps he was checking the incident too many times before feeling confident and sure. This could be the reason of less experience and the pressure of a call during such a big tournament. We have to give this process some time to develop.

When an incident/situation is under review, either by the referee or the VAR, then the correct decision has to be taken. So in case of a potential red card and after the review it's only yellow for the referee, this card must be given in order to take the correct final decision.

It's video. Calling it "technology" is a bit much. You think the VAR has the tools needed to both pause at the precise moment and do a mathematical analysis of the still frame to be certain with a precision of 2 cm?

The VAR protocols say "clear and obvious" for a reason. This is neither clear and obviously offside nor clear and obviously onside. As such, the decision on the field should have been supported. At least that's what we've been told so far. I'd love to hear FIFA's justification for annulling the Korean goal.

Sorry you are not correct. Offside is a factual decision. They can use lines to indicate if it's offside yes or no. So if the line (like on tv) shows it's 5 cm offside, the goal will be disallowed. Clear is clear. Only in case of intepretations you can speak about clear or not clear.

Maybe better to read the protocol carefully on the IFAB website before saying anything.

Sorry you are not correct. Offside is a factual decision. They can use lines to indicate if it's offside yes or no. So if the line (like on tv) shows it's 5 cm offside, the goal will be disallowed. Clear is clear. Only in case of intepretations you can speak about clear or not clear.

Maybe better to read the protocol carefully on the IFAB website before saying anything.

You didn't answer my question. You are saying it's possible to determine with 100% certainty if offside is right or not because it's a "factual decision." You're right. Ultimately, it is a factual decision. But the question is whether or not the VAR has the tools to make such a decision with certainty, based on video. He doesn't. The line drawn on television? That's not scientific. It's impossible to freeze frame the point the ball is played with 100% certainty--that freeze frame is a very good estimate, not a guarantee. And then there's the fact that the camera angle will not always be perfectly in line. This is basic science. There are at least three variables that have a margin of error to take into account. It's theoretically a factual decision, but a VAR does not have the tools necessary to be 100% certain on instances that are this close.

Minute 42' in Italy - Uruguay: VAR review for a penalty decision, penalty assigned to Uruguay but in this case it looked like López Castellanos didn't check the monitor and he whistled directly after having been informed by VAR officials.Must be rewatched.

Because referee should check the incident before deciding.Here the video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfXvn3FkJMoMinute 00:20In my opinion one can even discuss about the penalty call. Is that a clear and evident penalty missed? Why referee whistled without checking again the incident?

To me, clear penalty, so I don't have an issue with the decision being given by the VAR directly. That being said, as Ralph points out, DOGSO for holding is a RC, not a YC - the new DOGSO rules strikes again...

The team managing the FIFA 2017 tournament is expected to prepare football game that is of high quality and integrity as it has done the previous years. If you are a student do not allow your assignments to hinder you from watching the games as you can access High Quality Critical Literature Review Help.